Dear GNSO Review Working Group members,

This is a reminder.

As noted in the action items below from our last call, please see the attached draft charter for recommendations 26-29 for review and discussion.  Please also see below comments already received from Wolf-Ulrich Knoben.  Please send your comments to the list to facilitate discussion.

Best regards,

Julie

Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

Comments from Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:

• With respect to Rec 26 it is suggested to include SG/C ExComm members in the definition of "Relevant Party". I wonder whether this is useful. The ExComms' function is of organisational character. There's no "policy development" task behind compared with the GNSO groups defined under 5.1.a. and b. Anyway it seems from your list that these SOIs are already provided by the respective groups and no additional administration may be required. If so - let it go.
• Rec. 27: The suggestion "Operating Principles and Participation Guidelines could be modified to include a requirement for Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies to provide access to ICANN to their membership lists for aggregating into a comprehensive central list" is sensitive and has to be discussed within the SG/Cs. The requirements for SOIs should strictly be oriented along the existing definitions.
• Rec. 29: It requires a yearly update of all SOIs which make reference to holding leadership positions. That would be administratively overloaded. Doesn't the SOI provide an original date of provision and updates? This would help to calculate the total years of leadership when the "present" duration is given.

From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>
Date: Thursday, September 14, 2017 at 2:24 PM
To: "gnso-review-wg@icann.org" <gnso-review-wg@icann.org>
Subject: Actions/Discussion Notes for GNSO Review WG Meeting on 14 September

Dear GNSO Review Working Group members,

Please see below the action items and discussion notes captured by staff from the meeting on 14 September.  These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not meant to be a substitute for the recording or transcript, which are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GRWG/2017.

Best regards,

Julie

Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

Action Items/Discussion Notes 24 September

Action Items:

1. Timeline: Add OEC and GNSO Council Updates to the calendar.  (DONE – See attached.)
2. OEC/GNSO Council Report: Staff to provide a draft for review at the meeting on 28 September.
3. Recommendation 6: Combine with charters for recommendations 33 and 36 that also are pending the recommendations from the Work Stream 2 Subgroup on Diversity.  Determine if any aspects of the recommendations can be extracted and marked as completed.
4. Recommendations 26-29: Resend the charter to the list for review and discussion.

Notes:

1. Update on Consensus Call on Charter for Recommendation 31 – Ends COB 25 September:

• Recommendation 31 was put for review for 1 week - no comments were submitted.
• Consensus call began on Monday, 11 September, and will run through until 25 September - no comments made so far.
• If no comments or objections are submitted, the charter for the implementation of Recommendation 31 will be considered approved by full consensus.

2. Timeline/Status and Update to OEC/GNSO Council:

• Updates to the GNSO Council and the Board OEC planned for ICANN 60.
• WG essentially complete with Phase 1, and beginning Phase 2 (high-priority recommendations).
• WG slightly behind expected/suggested timeline - timeline was meant to provide guidance, but was expected to not be met in the event that implementation delays arose.
• Some Phase 1 recommendations deferred to Phase 2.
• List of recommendations completed in Phase 1 listed on Timeline slide 1.
• Recommendation 18 deferred from Phase 1 to Phase 2 - awaiting advisory.
• Recommendation 33 is pending the results the WS2 Subgroup on Diversity
• Recommendations 25 - 29 all concern SOIs for community members, currently on the WG agenda.
• Updates to the Board OEC are meant to be provided twice/year - next one scheduled at, or immediately prior to ICANN60 - staff will prepare a draft report, which should be reviewed within the next week - reports should be ready by mid-October 2017, to be circulated to the OEC and GNSO Council prior to the updates at ICANN60.
• Same report drafted for the OEC can be used for the update to the GNSO Council, likely to take place at the GNSO Council public meeting at ICANN 60.
• OEC support staff has provided a template to be used to complete the update report - report is meant to indicate the extent to which progress has been made, and any budget considerations that are required, what items have not been completed + expected completion dates and budgetary implications.
• Information required in the update reports are already captured in the staff-prepared implementation plan - will input this information in the OEC template.
• Reports need to be thorough enough to provide the OEC and the GNSO Council with the information required for them to understand the progress of the WG so far, and expected timeline for completion of outstanding tasks.
• Details available on WG wiki - can be linked to in the update reports.
• Dependency of recommendations 10 and 11 on work done by new gTLD Sub-Pro on outcome/report of the facilitated session for that PDP at ICANN 59 - report is being reviewed by the PDP WG leadership, and once shared, will be available to the GNSO Review WG - expected within the next few weeks.

3. Begin discussion on Recommendation 6:

• Progress on this recommendation (similar to recommendation 6) is dependent on the progress made on the CCWG-ACCT WS2 Sub Group on Diversity, specifically, their recommendations.
• Data protection/privacy requirements by GDPR scheduled to take effect in May 2018 may play a role in what data being recommended for collection will be permissible for collection and publication.
• Diversity subgroup is going through a second reading of its recommendations in two weeks.  If approved it will be moved to public comments.  Includes recommendations about data collection, metrics, and SO/AC groups.  It will apply to the GNSO if it is approved as recommended. Timeline: Second reading in CCWG and if approved then staff will prepare it for public consultation for 40 days.  Depending on comments the Subgroup may revise the recommendations.  Final is sent to the full CCWG, which has its own timeline to check the consistency among the subgroup.  Possibly done by ICANN61.
• Link in the charter to the work of the subgroup and indicate a timeline for completion.  Note also that the WG could adopt the recommendations and definition of diversity.
• As noted by staff, GNSO WGs already publish statistics on WG member participation in WGs - suggestions that elements on diversity in recommendations 6, 33 and others (26-29) could be consolidated to clarify dependencies on outcome of the CCWG-ACCT WS2 Sub Group on Diversity.
• Language exists in the recommendation 6 Charter on mentions of diversity in GSNO SG/C Charters/Bylaws - discussions in other groups, such as SSAC also exist, but different stakeholders recognize that there is ongoing work in WS2 CCWG-ACCT, and are also awaiting the outcomes there to not duplicate efforts.